Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chas. who wrote (57031)	10/28/2009 11:53:52 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217890

not even close to mark, imo

To: Chas. who wrote (57031)	10/29/2009 2:38:21 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217890

yes yes yes, maybe, perhaps, possibly but first, a morass of conundrum wrapped in ambiguity served up on hopelessness just in in-tray, per stratfor, on obama the supreme hesitator The Wait for a Decision on Afghanistan OCTOBER 2009 BECAME THE DEADLIEST MONTH of the war in Afghanistan on Tuesday after eight U.S. soldiers died in Zabul province, in the country's south. The soldiers encountered a series of improvised explosive devices, the most effective weapon used against U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan. Also on Tuesday, the Washington Post broke a story about the resignation of the senior U.S. Foreign Service officer in Zabul province, Matthew Hoh. The former U.S. Marine Corps captain -- who had served in Iraq and was working at the Pentagon -- submitted his resignation in September, saying he had "lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan." Hoh drew a sharp distinction between discussions about the appropriate strategy in Afghanistan -- which he had "doubts and reservations about" -- and the actual mission. He emphasized that he was primarily concerned with the latter. "The key parameters of the decision before the White House have been clear for some time." Hoh's statement questioned neither the strategy being executed nor the one being considered in the White House. An apparent rising star in the Defense Department (or at least portrayed as one in the Washington Post article) resigned because he no longer saw any reason for U.S. forces to be in Afghanistan. In other words, Hoh felt nothing substantial could be gained from the continued U.S. presence there, even assuming an increasingly unlikely best-case scenario. The Post story noted that Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, and Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special envoy to the region, both took immediate notice of Hoh's resignation and attempted to dissuade him. Both offered him promotions if he would stay on. But more importantly, the resignation offers a striking counterpoint to the efforts of the senior officer in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, to secure some 40,000 additional troops for Afghanistan. The assessment that led to that number (which was leaked in September, also to the Washington Post) was the product of a mature understanding of the challenges of the Afghan mission within both the military and the administration. Admittedly, the situation in Afghanistan has gone from bad to worse, and then to worse yet, since last year, when then-presidential candidate Barack Obama tried to refocus attention on Afghanistan during his campaign -- the deteriorating domestic political situation with Afghan President Hamid Karzai being only the most recent dilemma. But the fundamental realities of the situation in Afghanistan did not change much over the summer. The key parameters of the decision before the White House have been clear for some time now. And yet, amid rising U.S. casualties and increasingly loud cries from some quarters about "dithering," the Obama administration has delayed the announcement of a strategy for Afghanistan. On Monday, Obama insisted that he would not be rushed in making a decision. Obama knows that the consequences of this decision could define his presidency. Though the rationale for the delay is not yet clear, the delay itself is remarkable. The White House, which long has had the facts before it, has prolonged a decision -- knowingly opening itself up to increasingly effective attack from the political opposition. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs announced Tuesday that Obama will meet with the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Friday. Gibbs insisted that a decision is near. Perhaps the decision will provide some perspective. When the choice comes, it undoubtedly will be one for which the Obama administration is remembered.